The Sun. — London, England, 1810-01-09 00:00:00

NAVAL N FALMOUTH JAN. 6,—Arrivecl the Howler armed from the Down 4; Mary pa , ,ket, .captiin Po vecx, with a mail from the Leeward lsland 33 days fiom Tortola, (the .mail will not: be, in town until to-morrow) ; Prince of Wales packet, Capt . I( IRKNEss,' with a mail from Lisbon, in six days. PORTSMOUTH, JAN. B.—Catne in last evening . the Monarch, Earl Spincer, and Lord Keith, homeward• bound East India=n, which sailed under convoy of tile Princess Charlotte, of 38 guns, Capt. G. tostis. Ned the Vestal, OnToN, from . the Downs, for Came in this day his Majesty's ship Stately, of 04. gtins, Capt. J. W. D. DONDAs, from the. East ward. Ariived froM Spithead a few transports from : Lisb on , which sailed in company with about 20 sail f3 f transports, under convoy of the Cowius, of 22- Capt. M. SMITH. Arrived the Ar nicitia, WI GHTON, from GiAten -15'40', for this port. : _ _ S - diled the Mowbray, WILSON ; and Ranger ) , WRITEHEAD, for Sunderland. The Port Mahon, of 18 guns, Capt. J LAWSON, is appointed convoy, to the Downs. • COWES . JAN. ii.••••:111P. convoy for Plymouth and lieland got under weigh from hence on Friday eve» but did not got out of the Needles till yester c4 noon, and the wind is again become contrary, lo that it is thought they must put back again.. The West India convoy at the Motherbank I am itforrned still remains there., A Spanish brig called Los Tres Hermanos, Capt. 11 UNICAS, arrrived here this morning with a cargo °I wool, from Cadiz, bound for London. D 3 AL, !AN. 7.--The whole of the out Ward-hound Merchant vessels, East Indiamen; transports, &c. Which sailed on Friday evening, .have been forced back again by contrary winds, and remain in the Gowns. The .si.h and 14th regiments of foot, from Wai wbich were to have.been conveyed to Ports mouth in transports, this morning received orders to disembark bete, and have since marched to Dover. DEAL, JAN. 8,--Came down from the River his Majesty's ship Ulysses, and remains with the out- Were—bound. SIMERNESS, JAN. s.—Arrived his Majesty's ships &dent, Diaator, Solebay, and Safeguard gun-brig. J. 6.—Sailed his Majesty's ship Ulysses for Portsmouth. Went out, and sailed up the,Thames his Majes ty's ship Gorgon. Came into harbour his Majesty's ship Blake, Capt. CO DR INGTON. . Went out of harbour and anchored at the Great fore his Majesty's brig Vixen. JAN. 7.—Sailed up the River Thames his Ma itity's brigs Vixen and Thrasher. SHEERNESS, JAN. 7.—Arrived the Tower tender With volunteers and impressed men for the fleet. Sailed his Majesty's ship .Dictator fur Portsmouth. JAN. B.—Sailed up the River Thames three gun brigs to refit at Northileet. ISLANDS OF SCILLY, DEC. 30, 1 sog. TO ALL MASTERS OF VESSELS. Yesterday the. Sub-commissioners appointed by the Corporation of the Trinity House, to aet for the , regulating the pilotage of all vessels in and out of these harbours; granted a license unto eight persons,' who ou examination, have been found . fully competent in the knowledge of the 'several rocks and shoals .; the marks for avoiding the'sarne, together with thp setting of the tides, about these Islands. • • • Captain BEHESFORD is.appointed to the Poiaiers, Captain T GRAVES, to the:Musse?, vice JAMES; de ceasecL;_Cap.tainJ. Gpnnos t(3 the Rattier. ,Cap tains K 1 TOE, RAITT, JAMES, SELL, and, SH,E ,}tipp, are . yromoted to Post Captains. he Freya, Opossum, and Charybdis, which sail-. eil4afely frorr:Pomrnouth, _are gone to the West 'lndies. • Yesterday se'nnight a Court Martial was held at o• rtstriOnth, on Lieut. J. EVERARD,'Ot his Majesty's ship Saturn, for writing an anonymopsletter to the Lords of the Adatimity, imputing improper .condu& to Cai p >rain CW4IIEI‘I4ND, and for deserting from the Saturn;. oti the 2d ult. and taking with him his servant laiv, without leave. Li-utenant EvEnAnD acknowledged to have written the letter, although he previously publicly denied it. It Was upon a re presentation of these circumstances, that the Lords' -of the Admiralty...were pleased to order Lieutenant Evp,RARD to• be tried by a Court -Martial. The Cu L irt, - upon a full examination into the condu& of Lieut. EVEItAILD, determined, that the charge had been proved, and did adjudge 'him io be dismissed . hiS Majesty's service, and rendered incapable of ever serving as an Otticer in the Royal .Navy again. ---Rear-Admital °TWAY, President. The eleven seamen of the impetueux, charged with mutinous condud, are to be tried by a Court Martial at Plymouth. " Great business must be wrought ere noon :,"—so says the great witch HECATE, and so says CARTER, No. 8, Charing-cross, who, ihouat no great con itirer, prophecies that those who neglect the Got den Opportunity the present Lntt ry presents, will, When they read of the distribution of thousands they have do share in, regret they did not risk a to gain abun4auce, nsed wince ;iori& I en- vic -the Drni mho t the Ilant 111 a y atest case have ways (test. ctela, iards. row- Dr of bery • as lable of , an best Vic- an is vith- in a ions, at. lings of a f Sa- the: are msca . as in the ands. b,'ell ex- the :e of zelia, _ , :n der 1 At , on dons, ;cool g , at TEL. elny her t~~:~ orn the ac- niis e u.t try e titon, n. ith i h a tTC }is you . •luc came mat it 3411, me. y ' for fa- Ta.,y T a re al to that Lore. may r be Cns LWJ?L . LETTER FROM LORD miNTo AND THE oTHET, 911,.:M -BEits 'OF: THE BENGAL pitESiDENCY, TO ,SIR GEORGE BABLow. , • [Cncluded from Friday's Paper.l 44. ,The next complaint is the release of Liente nsnt-Colonel Munro. . . 45. When an army steps so far aside from 'the path of its proper and legitimate duties, as to be come the instrument of party, to znix, in po'litical views, and to undertake the removal of Governors or Ministers, we should have expeCted that ally. grievance they should adduce in support of a pro ceeding so foreign to their own character, should, consist„ at least e iresome act of grievance and intole rable oppression. The measure which is the sub ject of this complaint is, on the contrary, an act of grace and justice. . It is not the unjust arrest of any Officer for purposes of oppression and vengeance, but it is the relief of an Officer, amongst the most respected in the army, from the most tyrannical and detestable abuse of power by which an innocent and highly meritorious individual was ever oppressed. 46. We shall ever consider the prosecution, of Colonel Munro, and the part which Lieutenant-Ge neral Macdowall bore in that transaCtron; as eels of extreme injustice, so far as they relate to the indivi dual who was the subjeet of them. But these . Inca- - sures were not less culpable in other points of view. Both the advice which Lieutenant-COlonel Munro gave to abolish the Tent Contrad, which we con sider as the real obje& of the proceeding ; and the Memorial conveying that advice, a few lines in which .were made, without any imaginable founda-, tiou, the ostensible, ground of the charges preferred against him, had been, not merely approved, but ap- Rlauded by every authority to which they could offi cially be submitted ; by Sir J., Cradock, Commander in. Chief of the army of which the accusers of Co lonel Munro are officers; by the Governor and Council of Fort St. George, who hold the 'Su preme Military authority under whieh those officers served; by the Commander in Chief in India, to whom, as officers, they owed implicit reverence and respeol ; and, laStly,, by the Governor General in Council, the Supreme and highest British authority in the East. ' To charge either the measure which had been adopted under these authorities, or the reasons upon which it. was recommended, and which had been sane-boned and approyed by the same authorie ties, as " base and infamous crimes," was a studied insult offered . by those officers, and by ,Lieut.-Ge e neral Macdowall e . who supported and co-operated with them, to every authority which it was their elutY to respeti. This proceeding' aimed also dis tinetly at withdrawing the management and direc tion of all military arrangement, regarding the re gulation and economy of the army, from .the legal authority of Government, in order to place, it in the shape of Courts Martial, under the direction of the officers of the army themselves. Lieutenant- Colonel Munro was the nominal culprit, and the articles were to bear the absurd, and, for that 'rea son we must believe, the collusive and pretended accusation against him of calumny and gander ; but •the Tent Contra% or rather its abolition, was in ef feet to be the subjeet, for no other substantial sub jeEt existed, of the trial. 47. We should indeed have been su. prised, as well as concerned, if any considerable part of the Coast Army had been prevailed upon to stain the pure *and honourable charscter of their profession, by lending their countenance in any shape, or M any stage, tO a proceeding stamped as this prosecution was with injustice ate' oppression, and fieunded in such motives as all the cirumstances conspire to in dicate. 48.. But it is said, Colonel Munro was only to be tried, and if innocent, would have been acquitted— yet the Memorialists themselves allege that he we s already condemned—" ha% ing incurred the suspi cion of having anted in a manner that was most- ge nerally considered to have been criminal."—" Hav ing incurred the suspicion," are mere words of form. The meaning of the passage is a positive assertion that Lietitenant-Colonel Munro had acted in a.man ner that was most generally considered to have been criminal—We assume this to be the meaning of the passage, because there was no question concerning the feels. , . . 49. It is difficult to imagine, that such a charge as 'that which was preferred against Lieutenant-Colo nel Munro, should have rested only On vague re port, and that the officers whcesigned should not ;have used all the means in their power to obtain the .perusal of a paper'on which they meant to found an accusation of libel. We must, therefore, presume, that the Memorial on the Tent Contra& was in the hands of those who charged its author with defama tion. From that Memorial, therefore, never denied nor disavowed by Lieutenant-ColOnel Munro, and capable of certain and easy prOof, is to be 'collected— "the Manner in what he had acted," and - - if that ',twiner of- acing was already most generally -ac counted criminal, sentence 'was already - passed, so * far as faith can be given to the Memorial intended to be Trehented to this Government. We trust, however, more in the honour of -the army than in the party feelings of the Memorialiste, and-we hope ,they were ; tob — sarignine in their expeelations of so siojust a , sentence. ' But' although the acquittal • of Lieutenant-Colonel Munro must 'be ' supposed ' possible, it was not fit that such ae officer should be brought to the bar as a criminal for his honest ser vices; lt was not fit that the mode'of providing car rive for the camp equipage' of - the army, approved e and adopted as it' had been by all the legal autho rities in India, should be appealed. from those .au thorities . to a board of Officers. It was not fit tlik‘ this first *step should pass'without opposition, in the process of usurping the regulation of the army from GovernMent ,to the .Officers of the army. It was not, becoming that the Supreme Government, the Cornmander in Chief of India,. the GoVernment of Fort St. George, and the late Commander in Chief of that Presidency, Sir J. Cradock,'should hold up, their hands as culprits before a tribunal of officers sitting in judgment upun the deliberate measures of their Governments. •- 50. The whole proceeding was monstrous, and ' we repeat, in the stroogest terms, our warmest ap probation of your just, legal, ;and indispensable in terpoeition on that occasion, to vindicate the honour of your. Government, and, tb shield one of your hest. . and ablest' servants frorn an arbitrary and oppressive' abuse of power. If you had Omitted to do so, you . . - would have faile I in them - osi acted - d — tu your high station, ,and would have merited, because yon would have sanetioned,' that 'long of ins! encroachment Which was to ,follOW, rend of vi,Licit the' prosecution of Lieatenant Colonel NI anro have proved, to be'only the, first ek; eri t nental . sten. . 51. It admitted that the warrant to lioldto:tt t. Martial is addressed to the Commander in Chief; ' , 41,i1 we deem his authority exclusive in that branch of the public Administration., But the, ahus , e of a is ii power is illegal ; and . the supreme military cootroul of the Governor in Council tenth, in our jUdgment, and beyond doubt, to the prevention of such abuses: This does not suppose an habitual and in discriminate interference. We assert. only tor the Government of Fort Sr. George, a right'and a le;al` power to come, in extraordinary cases,' to fthe.sup port of their own authority, and against seditious en croachments combined . with the oppression of inno cent men, by a gross , abuse of the power confided to the Commander in Chief, in the'direaion of Mir 7 litary,prosecutionS. 52. If this ()pillion were wrong, there, are higher authorities, who have power to pronounce it er roneous, and to provide another remedy ; which in, that case would be necessary, for the evil supposed. 53. In the mean while your opinion was binding; and, when confirmed by ours, is still more so- on the Army of Fort St. 'George, who are not the judges either in the first or last resort on that sub jo. 54. This is not a question in which the Officers, of the Army could be justified to interfere. It con cerns the extent of your legal powers under the constitution of your Government, upon which they cannot sit in judgment. If the Commander in Chief, Lieutenant-General Hay Macdowall, differed with you, as he affects to do, on that point, he might_ have properly stated it to 'the Court of Direc tors and to his Majesty's Government, fi)r their de cision ; hut, when he appealed that question to the Army, which is subject to your authority in India, as be did by his General Order of the 28th January, he carried that controversy to a tribunal, the incom petence of which he well knew, 'and before which, the agitation of such a question, as it could tend to no -useful conclusion, so it could hardly rfitil to kindle. animosity and excit discord, tending assuredly .tor some mode or other of public dis order, and perhaps eventually to military insubor dination, and mutiny itself; in the progress of which ) calamity and distresS were sure to fall first and heaviest on his own friends and associates. 55. 'We pass naturally froth the General Order just mentioned, to the dismissal of the Officers who pahlished it tr) the Army; and our sentiiileurs on that subje:A.must materially depend on the opinion we entertain of the character and tendency ,Of the Order itelf. • SG. In &liberating ; on the subject, we have not thobght ourselves bound by the form under which the substance and real purview,of this piper has, for obvidos reasons, been disguised. 57. It purports to be a reprimand to-Lieutenant- Colonel Munro 3 . but substantially It cenvevs in every line a reprimand to the Government of Fort St. .-George; and that reprimand is addressed to , the Army subject to its authority. l'he subject matter of the censure, passed ostensibly on Colonel Munro, Tenders it inseparable from a censure on the Govern- The offence eh irgelt upon that Officer, in his appeal to the Pretideitt in Council, from an ar rest itvased upon him by the Commander in Chief, and the Gener:ll Order itself informs the Army, that the appeal which is the subject of his reprimand, was 'followed 1 lot by the reproof, but by the pro-. tetSti 58.0 iGovernment. Li utenanr Colonel Mu . nrO hadexliausted all • the mans he possessed of obtaining relief from the' Commander in Chief himself. This it was his duty to do in the first instance. But when justice' was denied in that- quarter, and when the hand of perse , tution pressed close upon him, we are decidedly of Opinion that he had a right to claim the protection of the Supreme Military Authority, which is vested by law 'in the Goveinor 'in Council of Fort St. GeOrge. 59. If that Government possessed a legal power to intervene in a case of abuse, it could not be cri minal in the party suffering under it to claim their protection; and tic cotidut 01. LieuL-Col. Mauro could not ;nstly be made the subject of a reprimand. do. That the Government of Fort, St .George is nut restrained by law from thiS particular 'exercise of the Supreme Military pov.ers which it posseL:ses; as acknowiedg - cd: by Lieutehanteneral Mac doWall himself, since he obeyed their order for . the riease'ois‘Lieutenant-Colonel Munro:. If that . order had. - not oily been an undue encreachme.it on his own authority aS Commander in Chief, but had been beyond the legal and coin, etent powers of those who issued it, he would not have been bound to obey it, as he distinctly..prolessed himself to be. ht. The Government of Fort St. George did not exceed therefore their legal powers ; and the only question that could be made was, whethr.r they. CK ercised them properly in the particular instance. On that point, undoubtedly, the Government.ofFort St. George is sunject to the respon , ibility u hick is inseparable from the exerc'se of ail delegated autho rity. But to what tribunal wer4 they amenable ? Wh-'re was :t proper ? \Vh -re was it for the public interest,•that Lieutenant-Gen:Nal Macdowail should carry his appeal ? To the Army of Fort S'ir. George, or to the King and Court of Directors ? • • 62 That he should coney tin's question to the Army, in the shape of a reprimand to Lieutenant- Colonel Munro, appears to be in contradiCtion to his own sentiments on •the subject, as wr have just stated them ; for, if: the Government, of Fort St. George had a legal 'Tower to release Lieutenant- Colonel Munro, it could not be cririAnal—it could not, in any mode or degree, be culpable—it could not incur the penalty of a reprimand--but it was his clear right and privilege to claim the legal and competent protthion of Government from the op- Rresion of the Commander in Chief. - 63. If the Governrivult, op the contrary,-Klid not posSi-ss toose powers, Lieutenant-Geueral Mac dowall owed them no obedience. 64. If the legality of those powers be disputed, notwithstanding the tehtimony borne to it by Lieu tenant-Ge. eral Macdowall's submission, it is ag;lin to be asked, to what tribunal that dispute i question ought to have been submitted— 4 o the Army, o.r to the6uprem e Authorities in England ? 65. 'lt is aiso to be inquired whether, in a contrc- - - _ versy bettVeen the Commander in Chief and 07e Government; concerning the limits of their re.tpe:- tive •1112110-itiec., it sva; lit that, Lieutenant-Genera; 01061:1 arnigate the deci4ol to hi n 4-1 1 .:: and ;,a , ,:-.tione.?_l !done by his ow-r n-ittioo in !,i. shnttid inoil a severe punishment on Lieut.- Co1on:::1'•MillIrr), !laving.v.ted on ;-1 cliff:rent oH.- n]n't ; I) , a :one ,vhieh It'd been supported by the judgment -of t:-:e G,sver:rment, that is to say, of aitd of a military anthoritv, t or th e : C,m i nnnder in • Chief hiniself, and .1 whore army, is made snbnrdin2te by al i t h e , 6r tisf, Leg,latu',..;.!—an authority to which they owed i.nplicit yb,.dience ; and v .iico 01,13., 3 , e try least, 1411 - been kit' to cllaileng , ,! sufficieil respect to c'xerunt an individual Officer from I - putation of a ciictit: fur having acted conc)rmauly it. • . 66. The reprimand to Lieutenant-Colonel Munro thetefore w'as not only not netessary,` but it ',va; unjust,' and inconsistent with the principle, Lieutenaut-Central. Madowall had hialicif pro fessed. 67. For these reason - s.we considn the shape given to , the General Order of the 28th Janulry as merely colourable and we are of opinion, .that the repri mand to Lieutenant-Colonel Munro was evidently intended only. as a Vehicle for circulltit 4 .g throng l out the Anny'serving under the GivVertlrllelt Fort St. George, a vehement and inteMperate public censure of that Government, and an inflammatory address to the professional feelings of that Army, on topics thought likely to produce irritation and disk order. It was, in. other words, a most seditious pa per, under the title of a General Order to the Art ny, and bearing the thin disguise of a reprimand to a par ticular officdr. 68. That this attempt to excite irritation, and to produce disorderly conduct amongst officers of the army, has .not been entirely unsuccessful, we lament the necessity of acknowleaging ; and that those de signs have nevertheless been substantially frustrated, and have failed• in far the greater' part, we have a cordial satisfaction in ascribing, first to the good sense of the arrity at large, which could not be 'mis led by fallacies so easily detected ; bnt next and prin cipally to the firm attachment to the dutie, of ult.:lr prof:esSion, and to that steady 1. l'a'cy an" incor ruptible fidelity, which, in that araly, we are con fident,. will ever- be found proof Itaitibt the art 3 and Seductions of flictiOn. 69., Notwithstanding the sentiment; we hwe expreSsed concerning the true- nature anti tendeury of the General Order in question, we hate not gleted to consider whether the officers w!io p7ivc t currency, by the orders of the Connnanie wetit responsible for its criminal purport, and *oil that Recount, justly remoyed from their offices. 7 . 0. In deliberating upon this question, WC 1-;.- soi . ted*naturally to such general principles applicaWe Ito the subject, w 2 thought best established, .and most free frorn_doubt. 7 t r . The following propositions have appeared . th us of that descr4,tion : - First—That, as a general princii le, a military ,-)f -ficer is notonly justified in obeying an order of his superior, but that he is bound to do so withriut re .gaid- to the quality of the order. Under this head we consider the Adjkitant-General as obliged, in-a peculiar manner, by the duties of his office, to pub lish the army any orders Which the' Commander in Chief -may commit to him for that purpose.-. We are clearly of opinion; as a general prin6ple, that the Adji4:ant-Generalis not bound to delib-!rate on the propriety of the order whiCh.he is command-. ed to - issue that it would be a breach of military duty to do - so ; that he is merely ministerial in these functions, and is not responsible, personally, fa: The propri - etr or impropriety of the orders he may circulate officially to the atmy. 72 We regard these principles- as very import ant,' and in a manner fundamental in the theory '():" military subordination. Secondly—We consider, however, as not less established, that the general principle above stated is subjea to exception and modification. The mo dification by which the general princ4)!e of simple obedienceaought to be limited, is in our judgment the following: That criminal orders are not to he obeyed ; and that the officer who executes a criminal order'of his superiot is personally respoos!ble for his condi.: We look upon this modification of the general. mi litay principle as forming it-mclf a great and primitive principle, not less importaat and fundamental fn . the civil secnrity of society, than we allow the othef maxim of implicit obed.ence to be for the due sup port of military subordination. - • 73. Considering then, as we have already stated, the General Order of the 28th of Jan. as - a seditious paper,'wv. might at once pronounCe the Adjutant and Deputy Adjutant General guilty of sedition, by the publication of that order, notwithstanding the au thority under which they aated. 74. tint that judgment would not be justified bv the were criminality of the order which they issued; and it is necessary, in order to establish their parti cipation in the crime,- and to render them personally resp6nsibie,qo spew that they were acquit:flied witi) the seditiouschara6ler of the paper. _ 75. In forming our judgment upon this point, we have not considered it as an abstratt que.tion, but as fit to be combined with all the circumstances at the case, and especially with those. in which the part concerni:xt were placed; and from this view of t 1 iptestiOn it. 1193, in our opinion, resulted, that Capper and Major Boles are to ne considered a, p:-tr taking personally in this act of Lieutenant . G.:ner-i Macdowall, and as deeply responsible for its perni .cious and.critninal tendency. 77. Before this order was prepared, it was not only known to .those two confidential Staff Of - fleet-4 of the Cothwanddr in Chief, but it was notorious to the whole army and settlement, that there was a warm and vehement- dissension between the Corn- mander in Chief and the Government. These 0 ficers were acquainted with the prosecution of 'Lieu tenant-Colonel Munro, and the part Which Lieu tenant-General Macdowall hail taken - (...teding. They knew that every step in thatextmoi transrttion was a studied insult to. the G-- mint - lent. They knew that Litutenant-Geneiai Macdowall had beCome the patron and clianii4 oi a Memel - jai to the C , )urt of Directors, highly dis.w proved by the President in Council of Fort S. George; %Ouch he had himself, at [he ,instance that Government, and at no distant period, Written circular fetters to discourage and suppress,, Lit which, ita asiper stake of hostility tuward , z4he per- , li